A tax by any other name….

In Biggs v. Betlatch, the Arizona Supreme Court will decide whether a Medicaid expansion tax is, in fact, a tax – or whether it is some other kind of non-tax … ›

PLF in the Daily Journal: Ruling imperils taxpayers’ right to vote

The Daily Journal published my column on California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, recently decided by the California Supreme Court.  As the op-ed points out, the ruling undermines Proposition 218’s requirements that all new taxes at the local level need voter approval. 

Join PLF for our annual Supreme Court preview event!

PLF and National Review Institute will once again host a Supreme Court preview event featuring a distinguished panel of Supreme Court advocates. The event, held near the Supreme Court, will take place at noon on September 29.

Why Fish and Wildlife is wrong on critical habitat

Recently, the Sacramento Bee ran an op-ed entitled “Why Fish and Wildlife is right on endangered frogs” that criticized a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of California farmers and ranchers. The op-ed misrepresents the lawsuit and perpetuates a misconception about the Endangered Species Act.

PLF’s lawsuit does not question whether the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was right to list three California amphibians as protected species under the ESA. Nor does it question whether the Service was right to designate critical habitat to conserve the species. Under the law, the Service is required to make these determinations.

The Framers’ fear of concentrated power was well-founded

In 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Raymond Lucia and his former investment company with violating federal securities laws and regulations. You’d think that Mr. Lucia would be entitled … ›

Designating non-habitat as "critical habitat?" Where does it stop?

In 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Gunnison sage-grouse as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act and designated over 1.4 million acres as “critical habitat” in Colorado … ›

PLF sues U.S Fish and Wildlife to protect small businesses

There appears to be a universal recognition that small business is the lifeblood of our economy and a necessary component of our way of life: Economic freedom is the foundation … ›

White House WOTUS update

We reported here that the Administration had proposed withdrawing the 2015 WOTUS rule as directed by Executive Order. And, that EPA would soon be issuing a new rule defining “waters … ›

The Nation's WOTUS problem!

In response to the President’s Executive Order directing the EPA to revise the controversial rule redefining “waters of the United States” issued in 2015, EPA proposes to withdraw the rule, … ›

Brand Logo for the blog page

A tax by any other name….

In Biggs v. Betlatch, the Arizona Supreme Court will decide whether a Medicaid expansion tax is, in fact, a tax – or whether it is some other kind of non-tax … ›

PLF in the Daily Journal: Ruling imperils taxpayers’ right to vote

The Daily Journal published my column on California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, recently decided by the California Supreme Court.  As the op-ed points out, the ruling undermines Proposition 218’s requirements that all new taxes at the local level need voter approval. 

Join PLF for our annual Supreme Court preview event!

PLF and National Review Institute will once again host a Supreme Court preview event featuring a distinguished panel of Supreme Court advocates. The event, held near the Supreme Court, will take place at noon on September 29.

Why Fish and Wildlife is wrong on critical habitat

Recently, the Sacramento Bee ran an op-ed entitled “Why Fish and Wildlife is right on endangered frogs” that criticized a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of California farmers and ranchers. The op-ed misrepresents the lawsuit and perpetuates a misconception about the Endangered Species Act.

PLF’s lawsuit does not question whether the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was right to list three California amphibians as protected species under the ESA. Nor does it question whether the Service was right to designate critical habitat to conserve the species. Under the law, the Service is required to make these determinations.

The Framers’ fear of concentrated power was well-founded

In 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Raymond Lucia and his former investment company with violating federal securities laws and regulations. You’d think that Mr. Lucia would be entitled … ›

Designating non-habitat as "critical habitat?" Where does it stop?

In 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Gunnison sage-grouse as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act and designated over 1.4 million acres as “critical habitat” in Colorado … ›

PLF sues U.S Fish and Wildlife to protect small businesses

There appears to be a universal recognition that small business is the lifeblood of our economy and a necessary component of our way of life: Economic freedom is the foundation … ›

White House WOTUS update

We reported here that the Administration had proposed withdrawing the 2015 WOTUS rule as directed by Executive Order. And, that EPA would soon be issuing a new rule defining “waters … ›

The Nation's WOTUS problem!

In response to the President’s Executive Order directing the EPA to revise the controversial rule redefining “waters of the United States” issued in 2015, EPA proposes to withdraw the rule, … ›

The Morning Docket

Stay up to date with the Morning Docket, a weekly highlight of PLF's best articles, videos, and podcasts.

A tax by any other name….

In Biggs v. Betlatch, the Arizona Supreme Court will decide whether a Medicaid expansion tax is, in fact, a tax – or whether it is some other kind of non-tax … ›

PLF in the Daily Journal: Ruling imperils taxpayers’ right to vote

The Daily Journal published my column on California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, recently decided by the California Supreme Court.  As the op-ed points out, the ruling undermines Proposition 218’s requirements that all new taxes at the local level need voter approval. 

Join PLF for our annual Supreme Court preview event!

PLF and National Review Institute will once again host a Supreme Court preview event featuring a distinguished panel of Supreme Court advocates. The event, held near the Supreme Court, will take place at noon on September 29.

Why Fish and Wildlife is wrong on critical habitat

Recently, the Sacramento Bee ran an op-ed entitled “Why Fish and Wildlife is right on endangered frogs” that criticized a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of California farmers and ranchers. The op-ed misrepresents the lawsuit and perpetuates a misconception about the Endangered Species Act.

PLF’s lawsuit does not question whether the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was right to list three California amphibians as protected species under the ESA. Nor does it question whether the Service was right to designate critical habitat to conserve the species. Under the law, the Service is required to make these determinations.

The Framers’ fear of concentrated power was well-founded

In 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Raymond Lucia and his former investment company with violating federal securities laws and regulations. You’d think that Mr. Lucia would be entitled … ›

Designating non-habitat as "critical habitat?" Where does it stop?

In 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Gunnison sage-grouse as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act and designated over 1.4 million acres as “critical habitat” in Colorado … ›

PLF sues U.S Fish and Wildlife to protect small businesses

There appears to be a universal recognition that small business is the lifeblood of our economy and a necessary component of our way of life: Economic freedom is the foundation … ›

White House WOTUS update

We reported here that the Administration had proposed withdrawing the 2015 WOTUS rule as directed by Executive Order. And, that EPA would soon be issuing a new rule defining “waters … ›

The Nation's WOTUS problem!

In response to the President’s Executive Order directing the EPA to revise the controversial rule redefining “waters of the United States” issued in 2015, EPA proposes to withdraw the rule, … ›

A tax by any other name….

In Biggs v. Betlatch, the Arizona Supreme Court will decide whether a Medicaid expansion tax is, in fact, a tax – or whether it is some other kind of non-tax … ›

PLF in the Daily Journal: Ruling imperils taxpayers’ right to vote

The Daily Journal published my column on California Cannabis Coalition v. City of Upland, recently decided by the California Supreme Court.  As the op-ed points out, the ruling undermines Proposition 218’s requirements that all new taxes at the local level need voter approval. 

Join PLF for our annual Supreme Court preview event!

PLF and National Review Institute will once again host a Supreme Court preview event featuring a distinguished panel of Supreme Court advocates. The event, held near the Supreme Court, will take place at noon on September 29.

Why Fish and Wildlife is wrong on critical habitat

Recently, the Sacramento Bee ran an op-ed entitled “Why Fish and Wildlife is right on endangered frogs” that criticized a lawsuit filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation on behalf of California farmers and ranchers. The op-ed misrepresents the lawsuit and perpetuates a misconception about the Endangered Species Act.

PLF’s lawsuit does not question whether the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was right to list three California amphibians as protected species under the ESA. Nor does it question whether the Service was right to designate critical habitat to conserve the species. Under the law, the Service is required to make these determinations.

The Framers’ fear of concentrated power was well-founded

In 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Raymond Lucia and his former investment company with violating federal securities laws and regulations. You’d think that Mr. Lucia would be entitled … ›

Designating non-habitat as "critical habitat?" Where does it stop?

In 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the Gunnison sage-grouse as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act and designated over 1.4 million acres as “critical habitat” in Colorado … ›

PLF sues U.S Fish and Wildlife to protect small businesses

There appears to be a universal recognition that small business is the lifeblood of our economy and a necessary component of our way of life: Economic freedom is the foundation … ›

White House WOTUS update

We reported here that the Administration had proposed withdrawing the 2015 WOTUS rule as directed by Executive Order. And, that EPA would soon be issuing a new rule defining “waters … ›

The Nation's WOTUS problem!

In response to the President’s Executive Order directing the EPA to revise the controversial rule redefining “waters of the United States” issued in 2015, EPA proposes to withdraw the rule, … ›